Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'monoprop tanks'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.

  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • Welcome Aboard
  • Kerbal Space Program 1
    • KSP1 Discussion
    • KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas
    • KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP1 Mission Reports
    • KSP1 Gameplay and Technical Support
    • KSP1 Mods
    • KSP1 Expansions
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP2 Dev Updates
    • KSP2 Discussion
    • KSP2 Suggestions and Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission Ideas
    • The KSP2 Spacecraft Exchange
    • Mission Reports
    • KSP2 Prelaunch Archive
  • Kerbal Space Program 2 Gameplay & Technical Support
    • KSP2 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • KSP2 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • KSP2 Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
  • Kerbal Space Program 2 Mods
    • KSP2 Mod Discussions
    • KSP2 Mod Releases
    • KSP2 Mod Development
  • Community
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
    • KSP Fan Works
  • International
    • International

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End

Last Updated

  • Start

    End

Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End

Group

Website URL

Skype

Twitter

About me

Location

Interests

Found 1 result

  1. AeroGav
    Something I just noticed. When trying to build something vaguely similar to a Space Shuttle, but that actually works and isn't a pig to fly, I have noticed that the size 1 monopropellant tank cannot be radially attached, it only has front / rear nodes for integration within an existing stack. Why does this matter I hear you ask? Surely radial monoprop tanks already exist? Here's the thing - every other type of size 1 cylindrical tank can be radially attached to wings, the side of fuselages to make engine nacelles (since the engines and intakes themselves cannot radially attach either). Now, my Space shuttle has quite a bit of LF/O storage in the Mk3 to 2.5m adapter in the tail. To balance the weight, I had to put an equally large LF/O behind the cockpit. Good, good, maybe we can do without that horrible external tank? Well, nearly but not quite. It needs more punch, and uses up most of it's LF/O while still below 20km/mach 4. So I figure I might as well make use of the LF capacity of the Big S shuttle wings and strap on a pair of Whiplash jet engines, since they are Shuttle-Era tech. But what to create the nacelles for these with? Size 1 LF/O tank? No ! I already got loads of this stuff. Mk1 Liquid Fuel Fuselage? No ! The wings already contain far more jet fuel than we're likely to get through Engine Pre-Cooler? Perhaps, but I'd rather use a shock cone intake for stylistic reasons/realism making this a waste of space, mass and drag. Structural Fuselage? Waste of space ! The real shuttle an OMS system, because cryogenic propellants boil off after launch and can't be used for maneuvering. So I'd like my shuttle to have Puff engines and base these jet nacelles around some size 1 monoprop tanks - hence my problem.
×
×
  • Create New...